DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
REC
Docket No: 01145-12
29 November 2012
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the
United States Code, section 1552.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 28 November 2012. Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this
Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted
of your application, together with all material submitted in
support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes,
regulations, and policies.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
You enlisted in the Marine Corps and began active duty on
14 March 1967, at age 17. On 15 June 1968, you were convicted
by a special court-martial (SPCM) of sleeping on post. You were
sentenced to a forfeiture of $150, reduction in pay grade, and
confinement at hard labor for three months. On 14 January 1969,
you were convicted by a summary court-martial (SCM) of being in
an off limits area, and being off the base during an
unauthorized timeframe. You were sentenced to a forfeiture of
$20, and confinement at hard labor for one month. On 16 March
1969, you were convicted by a second SCM of being in an off
limits area, and being off the base during an unauthorized
timeframe. You were sentenced to a forfeiture of $50, and
confinement at hard labor for 45 days. On 21 March 1969, you
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for willfully disobeying a
lawful order, two incidents of wrongfully communicating a
threat, and using disrespectful language. On 27 October 1969,
you received NJP for two incidents of failure to obey a lawful
order, and being disrespectful toward a senior noncommissioned
officer (SNCO). On 7 January 1970, you received NUP for being
in an unauthorized absence (UA) status for one day, willfully
disobeying a lawful order, being disrespectful in language, and
being disrespectful toward an SNCO. On 7 May 1969, you were
convicted by a second SPCM of being disrespectful in language,
disrespectful toward a commissioned officer, disobeying an SCNO,
wrongfully using provoking words, being drunk and disorderly,
wrongfully discharging a firearm, and wrongfully communicating a
threat to a SNCO. You were sentenced to a forfeiture of S276.
confinement at hard labor for six months, and a bad conduct
discharge (BCD). On 18 November 1969, administrative separation
action was initiated by reason of misconduct. You waived your
rights to consult counsel, submit a statement and have your case
heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 23
December 1969, your commanding officer forwarded his
recommendation that you be discharged under other than honorable
(OTH) conditions by reason of misconduct (unfitness). On 6
January 1970, the discharge authority directed an OTH discharge
by reason of misconduct (unfitness). On 21 January 1970, you
received an OTH discharge for misconduct (unfitness). At that
time you were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, conduct,
and Vietnam combat service. Nevertheless, the Board found that
these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing the
characterization of your discharge, given your record of three
NJP’s, two convictions by SPCM’s, and by two SCM’s of serious
misconduct. The Board noted that you waived your right to an
ADB, your best opportunity for retention or a better
characterization of service. You are advised that an RE-4
reenlistment code is required when an individual is discharged
for misconduct and is not recommended for retention.
Accordingly, your application has been denied.. The names and
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon
request.
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such
that favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitled to have
the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and
material evidence or other matter not previously considered by
the Board. In this regard, it is important to keep in mind that
a presumption of regularity attaches to all official records.
Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official
naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the
existence of probable material error or injustice.
2
Sincerely,
BRIAN J. GEORGE
Head, Discharge Section
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08496-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 June 2010. your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ali material submitted in support thereof, your late husband's naval record, and applicable statutes,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03541-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 February 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12082-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 August 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ali material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08316-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 April 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00082-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 September 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge, given your record of two...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06590-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 March 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. You elected to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB), which found that you had committed misconduct, and recommended an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05796-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 March 2011. On 14 June 1979, you received NUP for being disrespectful toward you a chief petty officer on two occasions, and failure to obey a written regulation. On 17 February 1983, after appellate review, you received the BCD.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02100-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 December 2009. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all materiai submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09065-10
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 28 February 1974, you received NUP for a seven day UA period. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07199-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 April 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Your request for discharge was granted and on 18 June 1974, you received an OTH discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.